'I
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORD$E$ 7 9'~99$
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 98-01419
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an
honorable discharge. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A .
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C).
The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only 'be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Ms. Ann L. Heidig,
and Ms. Sophie A. Clark considered this application on
10 December 1998 in accordance with the provisions OF Air Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statuy, 10, y S . C . 1552.
H fiRY C. SAUNDERS
Z n e l Chair
/
I
Exhibits:
A . Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
-
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E AIR FORCE
H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R
R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE B A S E TEXAS
JUN 0 9
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 1 1
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-47 13
SUBJECT: Application for Correction of Military Records -
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was discharged from the Air Force 15
Oct 58 under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Unsuitability) and received an under honorable
(general) discharge. He served 03 years, 08 months and 15 days total active service.
Requested Action. The applicant is requesting that his discharge be upgraded to honorable.
Basis for Request. Applicant only states that he believes that if a complete 201 file was
completed, records would show outstanding service prior to cause of Art 15.
Facts. On 19 Aug 58, applicant’s commander recommended that appropriate action be
initiated against the applicant to discharge him from service for unsuitability. Commander
indicated applicant was negligent toward all aspects of service life. He had been counseled
repeatedly in an attempt to make him useful to the Air force but, all counseling had been to no
avail. His attitude continued to remain poor, his response to any task was hostile and apathetic
and his performance was unsatisfactory. An Evaluation Officer was appointed to review the case
file of the applicant and indicated that the applicant had been demoted twice for infractions against
the Military Code and recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.
The discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed that applicant be discharged
under the provisions of AFR 39- 16 and that he be issued an under honorable conditions (general)
discharge certificate.
Di-scussion. This case has been reviewed and the discharge was consistent with the procedural
and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the sound discretion of
the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. The
records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
- -
Recommendation. Applicant did not submit any new evidence or identi@ any errors in the
discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received.
Accordingly, we recommend applicant's request be denied. He has not filed a timely request.
JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec
Separations Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
I 4 By letters dated 7 August 1997, 26 October 1997, 9 December 1997, and 16 February 1998, applicant requested reconsideration of his He provided copies of documentation submitted with his appeal. 3 AFBCMR 91-01962 JAJM recommended that the Board deny the applicant's request: (1) on the basis that it is untimely; (2) on the merits; and ( 3 ) because it does not meet the criteria for reconsideration. Applicant contends that his SF Form 88, Report of Medical Examination, dated 16 August...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Requested Action. Applicant appeared before a Board of Officers without counsel convened to review the pertinent facts and circumstances and make recommendation to the discharge authority if he should be discharged fiom the service.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . Applicant's master personnel record does not contain a discharge case however, record does contain a report of proceeding whereby the applicant was reduced fiom grade of Corporal to Private First Class on 12 Jul48. Applicant did not identifjl any specific errors in processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade in the...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant’s master personnel record does not contain the discharge case file however, his DD Form 2 14 indicates his discharge was for misconduct- sexual deviation. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received over 15 years ago and...
AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00030
Recommend t h a t respondent be separated with an honorable discharge, w i t h or without an o f f e r of P & R; or c. Direct t h e respondent be separated with a g e n e r a l discharge, w i t h or without an o f f e r of P & R. 6. The authority for this action is AFR 39-10, para exceeding weight standards. Copies of the documents to be forwarded t o the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C ) . The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant f o r review and response (Exhibit D). Enlistment grades were determined by the N P S grade policy and DOR was the date of enlistment in the Regular Air Force.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Requested Action. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant did not identi5 any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the narrative reason for discharge he received.
J AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-01394 , COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: my 2 2 1997 Applicant requests that he be given special selection board (SSB) consideration by an unnamed central lieutenant colonel selection board with a corrected 28 Aug 96 officer performance report (OPR) and a pending decoration included in his officer selection record (OSR). The appropriate Air Force off ices evaluated applicant I s...
The appropriate Air Force o f f i c e evaluated applicarit ‘ s request ana provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit Z The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D ) . T r. 0 additional evaluation was forwarded to applicant f c r re-Jie+; ar,d comment (Exhibit G ’ i . Applicant’s response to the additional evaluation is at Exhibit H. The appropriate After careful consiaeratio~ cf applicant's r e q u e...